Living High On the Hog

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Article Tools

Amidst the hoopla and media frenzy surrounding these exciting Occupy social movements, the question arises: how feral is the top one percent? How is it that the hyper-wealthy Americans have gotten so very much richer since 1970, and, in the jobless aftermath of the Great Recession of 2008, no one in our social democracy has protested until now? A deeper question is, why did it take so long for this “American Spring” to launch itself?

A dictionary definition of “feral” reads, “having reverted to the wild state, as from domestication.” I would liken the term “wild state” to a libertarian economist’s dreamy vision of an early “classic” capitalist economy with almost no taxes, no financial regulations, and paltry government services. The libertarian ideologues from the Cato Institute would accept only “the watchman state” where the government simply pays for an army, police, public transportation, and some public health.

The economics editor of the British newspaper, The Guardian, recently wrote that you have to go back over 80 years to find another English decade like this one when living standards failed to rise over a 10-year period. Here in America you have to go back over 50 years. He adds, “It is worth reminding ourselves at this point that those people at the very top – those complaining about the injustice of the [British] 50 percent tax rate – have had more than three decades of living high on the hog.” I am reminding us that our American tax rates are far below this 50 percent rate about which the parasitic British hyper-wealthy whine so loudly. Bush gave the hyper rich a massive tax cut in 2002 even while they supported waging ruinously expensive and idiotic military adventures he hid beneath the 9/11 tragedy. The hyper-wealthy reveled in this, and their slogan might be “all in it together – until the rich want out.”

The Gini coefficient is an international yardstick used to measure the “inequality index” in a country. As historian Tony Judt has shown in his book, Ill Fares The Land, economic inequality in the U.S. was much lower between 1945 and 1970 (meaning money poured into the middle), but began to get much worse from 1970 to 2007. Sometimes clichés make sense: the rich got richer after 1970, and the poor got much poorer while the middle class also lost buying power. In a sea of overpowering statistics of which many readers are aware, here is just one: in 2007, the top one percent of Americans earned 21 percent of the national income, and they owned a ginormous 35 percent of this country’s total wealth, figures far higher than in1970.

Given this startling and growing wealth inequality between Americans, the hyper-wealthy class’s categorical refusal to accept any tax increase has caused the outrage leading to the burgeoning “occupy” movement. The plutocratic Republicans in the House and Senate, who simply serve as bought mouthpieces for the hyper-wealthy, have already begun their campaign to stop the bipartisan Congressional committee on deficit reduction from making any formulations involving revenue increases (taxes). We all know that almost all of our Congressional representatives belong to the one percent.

We need the special “Buffet” tax on the hyper wealthy, a windfall-profits tax on big oil (we have done such a tax before), Obama’s jobs bill, and some kind of cap on the top end of federal entitlements. McConnell, Cantor, and the other Republican crony capitalists working for the feral rich will honor their unholy “no tax increase ever” pledge to a private individual, Grover Norquist, over their sacrosanct loyalty oath to the U.S. Constitution and the prosperity of American working people. The poverty level in the USA has risen to 15.1 percent; neither wealth nor jobs have been “trickling down” to the majority.

Of course our economy requires banks, but in effect the banks have socialized risk but privatized profits, and they refuse to pay higher taxes on their profits as they reward themselves with sickening bonuses. The conservative former editor of UK’s The Daily Telegraph, Charles Moore, wrote honestly that, “It turns out – as the left always claims – that a system purporting to advance the many has been perverted in order to enrich the few.” While Karl Marx’s predictions about the future were way off, his analysis of mid-19th-century capitalism with its horrendous abuses was spot on: without social legislation benefiting the majority of citizens and protecting them from the hyper wealthy, the gap between rich and poor – and hyper rich and the middle class – will widen dramatically. This is what the Gini coefficient shows.

Many of the hyper wealthy, the one percent, are indeed “feral” because they want to revert to unfettered “wild” capitalism and the 19th century. They enjoy flaunting their insanely increasing wealth. Just look to the bankrupt owner of the LA Dodgers who has siphoned off over $185 million from the team in order to fund his profligate lifestyle since 2004. The hyper wealthy one percent truly are un-American because they do not accept restoration of their original 39 percent tax rates of 2001, and they refuse to pay up for failed imperialistic wars they supported. The restoration alone, which is not a tax increase, would help alleviate the national debt, along with a wealth tax that should extend down to the $400,000 range (not Obama’s soft $1 million). Of course some reduction in Medicare costs is inevitable.

It may be that the major question facing middle-class voters is whether they trust Wall Street or the government to provide jobs and reduce wealth inequalities. In 1912, that great Republican president, Theodore Roosevelt, when hyper-wealthy Republicans truly loved their country, stated the goal of his new “Progressive Party” this way: “to destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the day.” One hundred years later, the 99 percent realizes this task still stands before us, and we now begin to confront the feral one percent and their libertarian ideologues.

Comments

"It may be that the major question facing middle-class voters is whether they trust Wall Street or the government to provide jobs and reduce wealth inequalities."

It's not up to either one. It's up to you and me. Stop waiting for things to fall into your lap, and go out and make it on your own. Wealth equality? What's that supposed to mean? We all should have the same thing, irrespective of how hard we did or didn't work? What's the incentive for working hard if I'm just going to end up making the same thing as some lazy low-life occupier? No thanks! Keep your socialist garbage in your own utopian fantasies! I (we) don't want it!

In order to make wealth you have to have the ingredients to do so. That's the whole point of the article, not to provide a glass of water for readers to drown in. Sign me up for a Socialist utopia, I'm told they are quite happy in Sweden.

Suicides by country for every 100,000 people, as SOMEWHAT provided by God, the WESTERN EUROPEAN NATIONS list (not Eastern, not Asian, not Latin America, not Africa, not Down Under, not Middle East, WESTERN EUROPE):

Sweden is 6th out of 15 listed Western European states, puts Sweden in the upper range.Also notice that most suicides do tend to occur in those so-called "social democracies" that "progressives" tend to love.But I must point that "social democracies" are the rave in Western Europe & therefore the predominant population so I'll let that 1 slip.But it is interesting that the lower suicide rates occur in free market countries.Jeez God, you are either definitely slipping in your old age, need a course on statistical analysis or maybe just trying too hard to make a lie your point. Or maybe you're 1 of those "progressives" & if that's the case: Bad God, BAD GOD! :) henry

@hank:"Actually Sweden has 1 of the highest, if not the highest, suicide rates of any western nation."

Except it doesn't, so...

@hank: "Sweden is 6th out of 15 listed Western European states, puts Sweden in the upper range."

So Sweden has one of the highest suicide rates if you ignore all of the other countries that have higher suicide rates. Kind of like how you're always right if we just ignore the fact that you're always wrong.

@hank: "Also notice that most suicides do tend to occur in those so-called "social democracies" that "progressives" tend to love."

Yeah, we progressives just go on and on about the "social democracies" found in Guyana and Belarus.

@hank: "But it is interesting that the lower suicide rates occur in free market countries."

Like those utopian countries known as... (wait for it)... Iran and Syria.

@hank: "Jeez God, you are either definitely slipping in your old age, need a course on statistical analysis or maybe just trying too hard to make a lie your point. "

Nah. He's just too busy wondering why he didn't rest the day before creating you....

Enough about suicide. Let's talk about the failure of the socialist ideal. Canada dropped many of their socialist tendencies in favor of a more capitalistic approach, which included ramping up oil exploration and drilling. Their GDP has gone up and their unemployment has gone down since. Americans are even finding employment in Canada. Germany has done the same. And, they've refused to continue to bail out Greece, a fine example of a socialist nightmare. In this country, the only real obstacles to starting a business and becoming prosperous, are the layers and layers of ever increasing government regulations, fees and taxes.

Considering most of the Feral Rich vote Democrat, I don't get the problem. They are FREE to pay more taxes if they wish, there is even a line on the 1040 to do so.

I just love Academics sitting on the Group W bench, in their Glass Houses, passing judgment on how you or I shall live.

Jefferson wrote, " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among them are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

To play the Rule of Man game, we might as well have King George back because the author would have his Government play the same Role.

I for one do not wish to Assimilate into the BORG Collective.

From my Libertarian point of view the Federal Reserve, massive Federal Bureaucracies, Lobbyists, Military Industrial Machine, all feed the Bad Boys of Wall Street that should have been allowed to fail.

Failure is what cleans the slate, gets rid of the RUNTS and fosters a Renaissance.

Bailing out the RUNTS just compounds exponentially the final price.

The Laws of Nature, demands that the price be paid, no matter what mind games or pseudo intellectual gyrations one wishes to play.

HGWMV: "From my Libertarian point of view the Federal Reserve, massive Federal Bureaucracies, Lobbyists, Military Industrial Machine, all feed the Bad Boys of Wall Street that should have been allowed to fail.Failure is what cleans the slate, gets rid of the RUNTS and fosters a Renaissance.Bailing out the RUNTS just compounds exponentially the final price."

Very well said & that my friend, is Darwinism, the same theory (yes, it is still a theory) that those same "academics sitting on the Group W bench, in their glass houses, passing judgment on how you or I shall live" espouse.Hypocrisy is what rules their view, do as we say, not as we do, that is the method. Worke for Lenin, Stalin & Castro right?The thing those academics can't figure is that average, ordinary folk are on to them.It was that kind of scenario (well, that & constant flip-flopping on the most basic issues) that cost John Kerry the presidency in 2004.No, it wasn't a "conservative conspiracy" or voter fraud, it was who Kerry chose to deliver his message to the AMERICAN people: IVORY TOWER ACADEMICS.These socially retarded individuals basically alienated the general population to the point where it made the actual candidate seem like 1 of them, hence the loss of the presidency.Look @ the recent local elections for SB City Council & you'll see a similarity.The press, the "progressive" politics of the area as well as the hatred & vitriol launched against the 3 so-called "conservative" incumbents should've guaranteed a "progressive" landslide for the 3 "progressive candidates running against the incumbents.It was not to be w/ 1 out of 3. Why? The "mouthpiece" for the "progressives" kept opening his mouth in the ivory tower academic sort of way he did throughout the campaign.In all, the professors need to go back into the ivory tower & do what they get $250,000/year to do: Teach, not preach :) henry

Hank-Darwinism as a tenet of Evolution is only a theory in the scientific sense which means it is open to testing, not that it is not proven.

Why does everyone always bring up Sweden as the socialist nirvana? After doing medical research and surgical training there for years, here are some anecdotes and facts.Anecdotes:The Swedes are really nice;The food is actually very good in Stockholm and Gottenburg;They are very social, in a reserved sorta' way;They still control their own currency, it's one of the "Euro Light" countries, so they have a semi autonomous economy;The weather in winter could make turn me into a crackhead;Their adherence to and honoring of cultural traditions at holidays is wonderful;The girls are not as pretty as Americans think;They hate the Norwegians because they have oil, even though they're both from the same tribes and were one country until a little over 100 years ago;Their healthcare system is great at delivering basic care and less successful at delivering more advanced care plus they don't have 14 million illegals burdening their system;They're not incredibly hard workers, but they have a great sense of national unity and pride.

Facts:They have a ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ANY DRUG, INCLUDING CANNABIS and they put you in jail;Their per capita alcoholism rate is astronomical;Their suicide rate is generally in the top 30 countries;Their alcohol consumption rank, as differentiated from per capita alcoholism rate, is generally in the top 30 countries;They have a ZERO TOLERANCE for ILLEGAL ALIENS with IMMEDIATE DEPORTATION and a process for becoming legal that takes several years;Health care is free;They get 10 weeks+- of vacation per year;They're not near the top of the world productivity index;They have been steadily moving towards more free market economics over the past 10 years and since the defeat of the Social Democratic Government.

Gosh, Sweden seems to be a mixed bag of good and bad, just like here...

"waz - Greece is less Socialist than the richest and most Social per capita country in the world.... Norway."- MMTSB

How do you come to that conclusion? More pro-socialist BS. And, I believe if you look at who is actually drilling for the oil in Norway, you'll find that it is not the Norwegian government that is doing it; it's privately owned companies that are doing the work. So, where's the lack of corporate capitalism there? Again, more pro-socialist BS.

Boy you guys got off Topic. Lets talk about what the early Progressives have given the United States of America in the last 100 years.

Note they came from the Right and Left - amazing how both sides feel they were anointed to run our lives for us.

One common thread, they were mostly Academics from Silver Spoon backgrounds or the 1%, as defined by the OP.

First we have transitioned from the Rule of law to the Rule of Man, right back into Eurocentric mindset.

Teddy Roosevelt, War Monger, ego maniac.

William Taft, the Sixteenth Amendment

Woodrow Wilson gave us the Federal Reserve Act, Federal Income Tax and World War I.

Franklin Roosevelt, World War II, tried to make moot the Supreme Court, Social Security Tax, voluntary - that did not last long), most of the Central Planning with have today.

The transition from the Rule of law to the misguided Rule of Man has created a Central Plan that consumes more and more each year and makes no progress- so much for Progressive.

The War on Poverty has been going on my whole life, and guess what all that has accomplished is Institutional Slavery, Borg living off someone else - no change.

Education that was once reasonably priced, now the student is an indentured servant to the Government for 80-100K, thank you Jimmy Carter and the Department of Education, nice idea but all it did is INFLATE the cost of Education.

It just goes on and on, Progressivism is just plan and simple EuroTrash Socialism.

Yes OWS has some standing, they should be outside the Capital - those clowns created this mess - of course the crowd that camped outside the Capital after WWI, got shot to death by their Government.

Oh and that BIG DADDY FERAL HOGZILLA, George Soros, that pays no Tax, what about him.

I stand in the middle and see the Pot calling the Kettle Black.

Libertarians are about Civil Rights and a level playing field, so every Person can be free to be all they can be.

Unfortunately Natural Law, which humans cannot control, has a thing or two to say about who survives and who doesn't.

Current Obit for a 1%er in SB that died at age 52 of a heart attack.

The Founders setup a system of Opportunity not guarantees, all we should want is a Government that guarantees our Civil Rights, the rest of the burden falls on us and life is not fair.

"The Founders setup a system of Opportunity not guarantees, all we should want is a Government that guarantees our Civil Rights, the rest of the burden falls on us and life is not fair."- howgreenwasmyvalley

I absolutely couldn't agree more! However, one thing is clear; it would no longer hold true under socialism.

Please remember that Norway subsidizes what ever version of socialism they have with a ginormous pool of free oil. For them to create their socialized system means they are poisoning the earth every single day according to the Progressives. Let's start drilling and pumping oil here so we can subsidize our own over loaded social system...

Regardless, that's what drives Norway's version of socialism, and it's not sustainable.

The discussion about a "living wage" which is where this ends up is entirely different and too large for these posts.

Social welfare is always needed for the portion of people that either refuse or cannot contribute. Norway's oil is why they've been spoiled into not having this problem screw them up. There are plenty of people on social welfare in Norway and Sweden and the populace and governments are not thrilled by it. Sweden's answer has been to become less socialized and create open mechanisms for outside funding without their own governments restrictions. I've done several large projects utilizing investment rules for us that their own people cannot normally access.

I wish our government still directly controlled our dollar but unfortunately we've been usurped by world currencies and now the Chinese and their unsustainable system may have more long term control over us than we do.

I've been a fan for years of utilizing natural gas until alternative energies are viable and economical. It's cleaner, it's proven, and we've got zillions of units of it.

I agree, there always has to be social spending. For the young, the poor, the disabled, the slackers, and the old

About decent wages... Shouldn't work be rewarded? Work is production.

We are in control of the dollar, not the Chinese. That is a myth. They choose to peg to our currency. They use us because we are great consumers. Our consumer infrastructure is the best in the world. They buy Treasuries because they have no other choice. They are getting paid in our dollars. If they don't buy Treasuries, they will lose that peg. If they lose that peg, they lose us as customers. If they lose us as customers, they cannot employ their masses.

Our Congress are the ones that can control spending and tax rates. Two tools that the Chinese do not have. They set the rules for debt ceiling and the sort. Not the Chinese.

How a society decides to reward work, and what work is, are broad issues and you know it. Your glib response about "decent wages" seems so simple; how a society gets there is neither monolithic nor irrefutable.

We'll agree to disagree on the effect of the Chinese on the value of our currency. Because of their penetration into our market, the size and vitality of their currency and economy, and their large ownership of financial instruments offered by the US I take a different view. We can find economists that agree with both of us so there's no winner here. I also suspect you and I would take a different path to straighten out this mess but we would both recommend a more proactive and less politically driven solution.

You imply that what might be working for Norway would work for the United States as well. And, if that is not your implication, I don't know what you're getting at. One major difference between the two countries alone will tell you, what might work for one, will not work for the other; population.

United States Population: 300,000,000

Norway Population: 5,000,000

To compare apples to oranges is inherently ignorant and/or intellectually dishonest. Socialism, especially in The United States, will not work.

waz - Sorry you got that from my post. That is not what I was implying. I am showing that more Socialism/less Socialism is a false dichotomy. It is not one or the other because as you can see being more Socialist does not cause the problems for Norway as we have seen in Greece. Which are more similar to each other than either are to the USA.